Evaluating the Diversity and Quality of LLM Generated Content

Abstract

Recent work suggests that preference-tuning techniques -- such as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) methods like PPO and GRPO, as well as alternatives like DPO -- reduce diversity, creating a dilemma given that these models are widely deployed in applications requiring varied outputs. We argue that diversity without consideration of quality has limited practical value. To address this issue, we introduce a framework for measuring effective semantic diversity -- diversity among outputs that meet quality thresholds -- which better reflects the practical utility of large language models (LLMs). Using open-ended tasks that require no human intervention, we find counterintuitive results: when using diversity metrics that do not explicitly consider quality, preference-tuned models -- particularly those trained via RL -- often produce outputs with lower diversity; however, these same preference-tuned models generate greater effective semantic diversity than supervised fine-tuned (SFT) or base models. Our analysis further shows another trend: while larger models may exhibit greater effective semantic diversity than smaller models, the smaller models are consistently more parameter-efficient at producing unique content within a fixed sampling budget. These findings have practical implications for applications that require diverse yet high-quality outputs, from creative assistance to synthetic data generation.